Clean Air Updates: NAAQS and Other Implementation-Related Topics

Clean Air Updates: NAAQS and Other Implementation-Related Topics

Anna Marie WoodDirector, Air Quality Policy Division

Office of Air Quality Planning and StandardsU.S. EPA

NACAA Spring Membership MeetingMay 7-9, 2012

Outline of Presentation

2

SIPs: Anticipated Schedule NAAQS Implementation Updates

Ozone PM SO2

NO2

Other NAAQS Infrastructure, Transport, and Regional Haze SIPs Exceptional Events Rule Implementation Guidance Policy on Wildfires and Prescribed Burns Draft NSPS Proposal for New Residential Wood Heaters GHG Permitting SIP-Improvement: Current Initiatives Questions?

Current Schedule for Ongoing NAAQS Reviews (as of May 7, 2012)

3

NOTE:

Underlined dates indicate court-ordered or settlement agreement deadlines.*As part of a court filing on May 4, 2012, EPA requested that the court require EPA to sign a final action no sooner than August 15, 2013.

MILESTONE

POLLUTANT

NO2/SO2

SecondaryPM Ozone Lead NO2 Primary SO2 Primary CO

NPR Jul 12, 2011 TBD 2013 Jan 2014 Aug 2015 Feb 2016 Jul 2016

NFR Mar 20, 2012Intended

Aug 2013*2014 Nov 2014 May 2016 Nov 2016 Apr 2017

Anticipated NAAQSImplementation Milestones

PollutantFinal NAAQS

Date (or Projection)

Infrastructure SIP Due

Designations

Effective

Attainment Demonstration

Due

Attainment Date

PM2.5 (2006) Oct 2006 Oct 2009 Dec 2009 Dec 2012Dec

2014/2019

Pb Oct 2008 Oct 2011Dec

2010/2011

June

2012/2013Dec

2015/2016

NO2 (primary) Jan 2010 Jan 2013 Feb 2012 none none

SO2 (primary) June 2010 June 2013 TBD TBD TBD

Ozone (2008) Mar 2008 Mar 2011 Mid 2012 2015 2015-2032

PM(current review)

Intended

August 2013*August 2016 2015 2018 2020/2025

Ozone(current review)

2014 2017 2016 2019 2019-2036

4

*As part of a court filing on May 4, 2012, EPA requested that the court require EPA to sign a final action no sooner than August 15, 2013.

2008 Ozone NAAQS Designations and Implementation EPA is under litigation to designate areas for the 2008 ozone NAAQS

by May 31, 2012 (consent decree deadline) 45 areas designated nonattainment on April 30, 2012, including 2

separate tribal areas Only 3 have never before been designated nonattainment for ozone

Chicago area (IL, IN, WI) expected to be designated by May 31, 2012.

Designations effective 60 days after FR publication.

Two rules are being expedited in parallel with designations to implement 2008 ozone NAAQS• 2008 Ozone NAAQS Classifications Rule:

Established classification thresholds and end-of-year attainment dates

Reclassified 6 areas in California that had previously requested bump up for 1997 NAAQS.

Revokes the 1997 standard only for purposes of transportation conformity 1 year after 2008 NAAQS designations.

Signed April 30, 2012. Effective 60 days after FR publication.• 2008 Ozone NAAQS SIP Requirements Rule:

Addresses remaining implementation issues Current schedule: proposal in mid-2012; final in winter 2013

5

Overview of 2008 Ozone SIP Requirements Rule Rule and guidance addressing SIP requirements under Subpart

2 Current schedule: proposal in mid-2012; final in winter 2013 What the proposed rule will cover:

Attainment Demonstration SIPs Reasonable Further Progress (RFP) Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) Contingency measures New Source Review (NSR) Emissions Inventory Rural Nonattainment Areas Flexible Programs (e.g., Ozone Advance) Anti-backsliding provisions

We intend to set up a discussion with states to provide more details on this rulemaking

Interstate transport of ozone will be addressed in separate guidance

6

Other Ozone-related Actions Widespread Use of Onboard Refueling Vapor Recovery and

Stage II Waiver Proposed rule issued July 2011 would waive the requirement for

Stage II vapor recovery systems at gasoline refueling stations in Serious and above areas by June 2013. Does not waive independent “Stage II or comparable measures” requirement in Ozone Transport Region

Public comment period closed September 2011. Final rule expected by summer 2012. Based on comments we received and further technical analysis we expect widespread use data will be some time in 2012.

EPA also intends to issue separate guidance in summer 2012 to address 1) technical aspects of removing existing Stage II programs from SIPs, and 2) satisfying the OTR “comparable measures” requirement

Numerous affected States and industry stakeholders have provided input for guidance, currently under development

7

Other Ozone-related Actions (cont.) Revision to Monitoring Rules

Proposed July 2009 to modify minimum monitoring requirements in urban areas, add new minimum monitoring requirements in non-urban areas, and extend the length of the required ozone monitoring season in some states

Focus has shifted to revising ozone season requirements vs. expanding network size

Status on final rule is TBD.

Emission Reduction Measures Information Menu of control measures provides state, local and tribal air agencies

with the existing emission reduction measures as well as relevant information concerning the efficiency and cost effectiveness of the measures

State, local and tribal agencies will be able to use this information in developing emission reduction strategies, plans and programs

The menu of control measures can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html

8

Other Ozone-related Actions (cont.) Revisions to implementation rules for 1997 8-hr ozone NAAQS

Classification of former subpart 1 areas under subpart 2 final rule On April 27, 2012, EPA finalized revisions to the 2004 Phase 1rule that State, tribal and

local air pollution control agencies would follow to meet the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. Effective 30 days after FR publication. Areas have 12 months from effective date to provide any outstanding SIP elements.

This action resulted in 16 ozone nonattainment areas, previously classified under Subpart 1, reclassified as Marginal or Moderate under Subpart 2 provisions of the CAA.

RACT/RACM policies proposal Proposal to revise presumption that NOx SIP Call and CAIR satisfy nonattainment area

RACT/RACM requirements for covered sources, per July 2009 court decision. Proposal would also revise economic feasibility guidance for RACT/RACM and RFP policy for the

1997 PM2.5 NAAQS.

EPA intends to propose rule this summer 2012

RFP credit final rule for emissions reductions outside ozone nonattainment areas Proposed December 2010 to limit RFP credit only to reductions “in the area,” in

response to court decision.

We are in the process of evaluating when we will take final action on the rule.9

Ozone Advance Program Program to encourage progress to reduce ozone pollution in the

near term. It is designed to help attainment areas work proactively to stay in

attainment of the 2008 ozone NAAQS or any future revised NAAQS. EPA launched the program on April 4, 2012. Advantages of participating in Ozone Advance include the ability

to collaborate with EPA to get measures/programs in place expeditiously to 1. Ensure continued protection of public health2. Avoid nonattainment3. Use available resources to address ozone efficiently and effectively.

Ozone Advance does not establish new requirements or defer/avoid any existing requirements; this is not an Early Action Compact program with deferred nonattainment designations.

Guidance can be found at www.epa.gov/ozoneadvance. Questions and Sign-up letters can be sent to [email protected]

or by contacting Laura Bunte at [email protected].

10

1-Hour Ozone NAAQS Litigation EarthJustice, Sierra Club and other environmental groups have brought

litigation to compel EPA to make determinations whether a number of Severe/Extreme 1-hour ozone nonattainment areas attained by attainment dates In accordance with a settlement agreement with Sierra Club, EPA proposed

determinations regarding 1-hour ozone attainment deadlines for NY-NJ-CT, Baltimore, Houston, W-Ma, E-MA and Greater CT. Sierra Club submitted adverse comments on several issues raised by EPA’s proposed determination for NY-NJ-CT

Settlement agreement deadline for EPA to make final determinations is May 31, 2012.

In response to other litigation, EPA has published final determinations of failure to attain the 1-hour ozone standard for San Joaquin Valley, South Coast, and Southeastern Desert Environmental groups recently filed a Petition for Review in the 9th Circuit challenging

these determinations Briefing has been delayed until Fall 2012.

Section 185 Fee Program SIP Actions Findings of failure to submit for 4 California areas triggered sanctions clocks for July

2012 (offsets) and January 2013 (highway funds). Failure to attain findings, when final, for NY, Baltimore, Houston trigger requirement to implement Section 185 program.

Section 185 “Termination Determinations” have been proposed for Sacramento and finalized for Baton Rouge. New York has also submitted request. Adverse comments on Sacramento leading us to consider requiring additional support akin to

maintenance plans and contingency measures EPA proposed approval of alternative programs for San Joaquin Valley, South Coast,

and SE Desert with stay of sanctions in August 2011.11

1997 Ozone NAAQS Litigation Based on settlement agreements and consent decrees related

to 1997 ozone NAAQS infrastructure SIPs, there are upcoming deadlines for EPA action (proposal or final) on one or more elements of 14 states' SIPs between now and June 2014

Partial disapproval of Texas infrastructure SIP Petition for review filed by Texas on partial disapproval for lack of

PSD GHG regulation. EPA entered into a settlement agreement with Sierra Club to

make determinations whether several areas attained by their attainment date for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS. These areas are: NY-NJ-CT, St. Louis, Western-MA (W-MA) and Eastern-MA (E-MA) Deadline for EPA to make final determinations for NY-NJ-CT is May

31, 2012. Deadline for EPA to make final determinations for St. Louis, W-MA

and E-MA is July 31,2012. St. Louis has already been finalized.

12

2008 Ozone NAAQS Litigation Petition for review filed by Earthjustice and others on failure to finish the

reconsideration action on the 2008 ozone NAAQS Case dismissed February 17, 2012 finding EPA took no final action EPA intends to complete the reconsideration as part of the 2013/2014 review.

Deadline suit filed by WildEarth Guardians in US District Court (AZ) for failure to promulgate area designations for the 2008 ozone NAAQS Consent decree requiring action by May 31, 2012.

Deadline suit for failure to issue PSD regulations (e.g., PSD increments) for 2008 ozone NAAQS under Section 166 of the Act A has filed a partial motion to dismiss arguing no duty to issue a Section 166 rule for

revised NAAQS and is awaiting a decision from the court. Plaintiffs have filed motion for summary judgment, arguing that the court should require

EPA to issue a proposed Section 166 rule within 8 months and a final rule within a year; briefing is ongoing.

Deadline suit filed by WildEarth Guardians and Sierra Club to compel the Agency to make findings of failure to submit ozone infrastructure SIPs for 2008 NAAQS and to take final action on the SIPs for TN and KY Currently responding to Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment regarding a schedule

for this action.13

Other Ozone-related Litigation (cont.) Sierra Club suit to compel EPA to respond to prior

petition to designate through regulation model(s) to use to determine if PSD major sources will cause or contribute to a violation of the ozone NAAQS and PM2.5 NAAQS and increments, and to compel EPA to specify with reasonable particularity such models EPA granted the petition to engage in rulemaking to evaluate

whether updates to Appendix W are warranted for ozone and secondary PM2.5, and to incorporate new analytical techniques or models as appropriate (Jan. 4, 2012). The parties have filed a stipulation of dismissal of both claims in the case (Jan. 16, 2012).

14

PM NAAQS – Current Review Current review includes EPA’s response to 2009 remand of

primary annual PM2.5 standard and secondary PM2.5 standards as set in 2006

Policy Assessment (April 2011) presents EPA staff conclusions on the broadest range of policy options supported by the latest science; includes summary of Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) advice

EPA has repeatedly said that it has no plans to tighten the PM10 standards

As part of court filings in January 2012 and May 2012, EPA identified a schedule for completing its review Proposed rule – Summer 2012 Final rule – August 2013 (On May 4, 2012, EPA requested that the

court require EPA to sign a final action no sooner than August 15, 2013).

If current review results in new/revised standards, revisions to implementation guidance/rule likely to be proposed around time of the final NAAQS, in advance of designations EPA intends to work with NACAA in advance of any such proposals.

15

PM2.5 NAAQS Implementation

SIP timeline for 2006 standards Designations effective in December 2009 Attainment demonstration SIPs due December 2012

Infrastructure litigation and SIP obligations for 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS Based on a consent decree related to 1997 PM2.5 NAAQS

infrastructure SIPs, there are upcoming deadlines for EPA action (proposal or final) on one or more elements of 20 states' SIPs (including interstate transport SIPs) between now and June 2014

16

PM2.5 NAAQS Implementation (cont.) Guidance for 2006 standards signed March 2, 2012

Clarified several issues, including RFP milestone years, seasonal emission inventory issues, policy for contingency measures

Also clarified that framework of existing implementation rule 40 CFR 51 Subpart Z (§51.1000) is appropriate for attainment planning for 2006 PM2.5 standards

Permitting PSD and Nonattainment NSR Program SIP revisions were due May 16, 2011. 1997

PM10 Surrogate Policy can no longer be used to satisfy PSD or NNSR requirements for PM2.5

Recent revision to 2008 Interpollutant Offset Substitution policy confirms ability to allow substitution but withdraws presumptively approvable ratios, which were never codified. States need to provide adequate technical justification for any offset ratios they may develop and submit for EPA approval.

As with ozone, Sierra Club suit filed August 31, 2011 to compel EPA to respond to their petition requesting EPA to specify an official model to determine if major sources of PM2.5 precursors violate the NAAQS EPA granted the petition to engage in rulemaking to evaluate whether updates to Appendix W are

warranted for ozone and secondary PM2.5, and to incorporate new analytical techniques or models as appropriate (Jan. 4, 2012). The parties have filed a stipulation of dismissal of both claims in the case (Jan. 16, 2012).

17

PM2.5 SILs & SMC Litigation Sierra Club has challenged EPA’s legal authority to promulgate

Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentrations (SMC), as well as the specific SIL and SMC values for PM2.5 that we promulgated on October 20, 2010. We submitted a Respondent’s Brief to the Court (Brief) on April 6, 2012. Brief defends our authority under section 165(a)(3) to allow the use of SILs to

demonstrate compliance with NAAQS and increments Brief also acknowledges need to revise regulatory text at paragraph (k)(2) of

both PSD regulations (51.166 and 52.21), which provides that source impacts (alone) less than the PM2.5 SIL would be deemed to satisfy the demonstration of compliance with the NAAQS and increments. We asked the Court to remand and vacate paragraph (k)(2) while EPA undertakes rulemaking to revise the regulatory text to provide discretion to not rely only on the de-minimis source impacts where they would cause a new violation.

We are in the process of developing guidance to assist EPA Regional Offices and States in the appropriate use of PM2.5 SILs during interim period until PSD regulations are revised.

We will work with stakeholders to address specific permit issues, including any challenges to permits that relied on our 2010 SIL values.

18

Progress on Ozone and PM2.5

Attainment (as of April 2012)

1997 8-hr Ozone2004

designations

1997 PM2.5 2005

designations

2006 PM2.5

2009 designation

s

Initial Nonattainment Areas 113 39 32

Redesignations Approved Areas

70 4 0

Current Nonattainment Areas 43 35 32

Clean Data Determinations 27 38 6

Pending Proposed Redesignation Requests

4 3 1

19

SO2 NAAQS Implementation

20

New primary SO2 1-hr standard promulgated June 2010 We announced to states on April 12th that we are:

Continuing the process to “designate” areas as quickly as possible, focusing on areas with sufficient ambient air quality data

Organizing a series of stakeholder meetings to get focused input to help us refine our approach for establishing whether areas are meeting the SO2 standard

Since we may change our proposed approach for determining attainment, we don’t expect states to submit a “modeling demonstration” showing future attainment for areas that get designated “unclassifiable” – most likely those areas without SO2 monitors - as part of their June 2013 infrastructure SIPs

We intend to issue further guidance and/or rulemaking addressing SO2 SIPs following the stakeholder discussions.

NO2 NAAQS Implementation 1-hr 100 ppb standard promulgated January 2010 Guidance on NO2 PSD permit modeling issued June

2010 and March 2011. See http://www.epa.gov/NSR/guidance.html

Designations of “unclassifiable/attainment” for all areas became effective in February 2012

New monitoring network: 52 near-road sites in cities with population > 1 million EPA has committed to do a rulemaking to extend the

implementation deadlines for the NO2 near-road monitoring network

Current deadline is January 1, 2013 Infrastructure SIPs due January 2013; guidance

planned.21

Implementation Updates for Other NAAQS NO2/SO2 Secondary NAAQS

On March 20, 2012, EPA announced it is retaining the current NO2 and SO2 secondary standards to address the direct effects on vegetation of exposure to gaseous oxides of nitrogen and sulfur. We did not add new standards to address effects associated with the deposition of

oxides of nitrogen and sulfur on sensitive aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Thus there are no upcoming implementation milestones associated with the

retained standard. Longer term

Planning a 5-year field pilot program to collect and analyze data to inform next NAAQS review

3-5 locations in acid-sensitive ecoregions (starting 2013)

Pb NAAQS Round 2 of initial designations was completed in November 2011.

Attainment SIPs are due in June 2013; attainment deadline is December 2016. http://www.epa.gov/leaddesignations/2008standards/

Updated implementation website that provides a Pb SIP toolkit http://epa.gov/air/lead/implement.html.

RACT/RACM guidance issued March 2012 Infrastructure SIP deadline October 2011. As of April 2012, 18 of 53 states

have submitted SIPs22

Infrastructure SIP Obligations

NAAQS Due dateunder CAA

Notes

1997 Ozone July 2000 July 2010 Consent Decree: i-SIP obligations remain for 1 state (MT)Fall 2011: Settlement agreement includes i-SIP obligations for 16 states; obligations remain for 12 states; deadlines all in 2012

2008 Ozone March 2011 Draft infrastructure SIP guidance anticipated summer 2012

1997 PM2.5 July 2000 NOI received, but no further actions taken by litigants

2006 PM2.5 Sept 2009 September 2011: Made findings of failure to submit for 8 states, starting FIP clockOct 2011: Entered Consent Decree for 20 states; EPA final action due in 2012 (AR, NM in 2013)March 2012: Complaint filed for 8 states; CD deadlines likely

2008 Lead October 2011 Infrastructure SIP guidance issued in October 2011

2010 NO2 January 2013 Draft infrastructure SIP guidance anticipated summer 2012

2010 SO2 June 2013 Infrastructure SIP guidance proposed in September 2011; revised draft guidance anticipated summer 2012

23

Infrastructure SIP Issues Infrastructure SIP guidance for 2008 ozone NAAQS is under development

We are considering the best approach for getting state input on draft guidance We intend to issue the guidance this summer Current plan is for this 2008 ozone guidance to additionally serve as guidance for the

2010 NO2 NAAQS and SO2 NAAQS

Latest EPA guidance for infrastructure SIP submissions is tending toward more specificity than in the past, driven by increased litigation, consent decrees, and adverse comments For example, past comments have led to state action on NOx as a precursor for ozone

in PSD; inclusion of state boards/conflict of interest provisions/CAA section 128

EPA approval of a new SIP submittal must not be misinterpreted as re-approval of already SIP-approved provisions involving: Excess emissions of a facility at times of startup, shutdown, or malfunction (“SSM”) Director’s discretion Minor source NSR program NSR Reform amendments

Sierra Club Start up-Shut down Malfunction (SSM) petition (June 2011) Identifies 39 states across all 10 Regions EPA will begin rulemaking Action to grant or deny required by settlement agreement due by August 2012 (may

involve SIP calls)24

Interstate Transport Requirements Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) of the CAA requires submittal of substantive

interstate transport SIPs in the same timeframe as infrastructure SIP submittals

SIPs must contain provisions prohibiting emissions that contribute significantly to downwind nonattainment with (or interfere with maintenance of) a NAAQS by any other state Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) also contains provisions prohibiting downwind interference

with PSD or visibility requirements

Transport Rule (i.e., CSAPR) quantified certain states’ obligations pursuant to section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) with respect to 1997 ozone and PM2.5 and 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS.

Interstate transport requirements apply for all NAAQS in all states. In the western US, for 1997 ozone and PM2.5 NAAQS, interstate transport SIPs

are generally done, though a handful of issues remain with visibility prong (linkage to RH SIPs)

25

2006 PM2.5 and 2008 Ozone NAAQS Interstate Transport SIP Litigation For the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS:

In September 2009, SIPs were due and EPA issued guidance EPA made findings of failure to submit for 29 states in June 2010 and for TN in July 2011 for section

110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I); FIP deadline for several states approaching in July 2012 because of June findings Based on a consent decree for infrastructure SIPs, there are upcoming deadlines for EPA action on

20 states' SIPs between now and October 2013 All states have a statutory obligation to submit interstate transport SIPs. For states included in CSAPR modeling domain:

If state was found to have emissions that significantly contribute to air quality problems in another state, EPA promulgated FIPs in the CSAPR to address such emissions. These FIPs were stayed by the D.C. Circuit in December 2012.

If state was found not to “significantly contribute” or “interfere” the Transport Rule’s technical analysis can be used to supplement SIP approval actions

For states not included in CSAPR modeling domain (West): States must develop transport SIPs, and we encourage them to work with their EPA Regional Office regarding

analyses to support these SIP actions Recent complaint amended by Sierra Club (4/24/12) for failure to take final action on 9 states’ SIPs

and to make finding of failure to submit for 2 states SIPs

For the 2008 ozone NAAQS: Transport SIPs for 2008 ozone NAAQS were due March 2011 Deadline suit filed by WildEarth Guardians and Sierra Club to compel the Agency to make findings

of failure to submit ozone infrastructure SIPs for 2008 NAAQS and to take final action on the SIPs for TN and KY Currently responding to Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment regarding a schedule for this action.

26

Interstate Transport Litigation

27

CSAPR: awaiting decision by DC Circuit Oral arguments April 13 Decision anticipated this summer Currently continuing to implement CAIR.

On January 10, EPA restored 2012 CAIR allowances to accounts.

EPA has also allocated 2012 allowances for states that submitted allocation files after January 10

Additional CSAPR notices Dec.15, 2011: final supplemental notice for 5 ozone

states Feb. 21, 2012: final notice with technical adjustments

to allocations, new source set-aside, and allocations for a number of states

Feb. 21, 2012: direct final/parallel proposal for additional revisions. [note: EPA intends to withdraw direct final because adverse comments were submitted]

Consent Decrees for Regional Haze

28

EPA has entered into consent decrees which have established schedules for taking action on all regional haze SIPs except Florida Consent decrees are with WildEarth Guardians (WEG), National Parks Conservation

Association (NPCA) et al., Sierra Club, and Kentucky Environmental Foundation

The consent decrees resulted from the litigants filing complaints for EPA’s: Failure to take action on submitted SIPs for states that did not receive a “finding of

failure to submit” notice in January 2009, and Failure to promulgate FIPs for states that did receive a 'findings' notice

The largest consent decree with NPCA et al. involves 48 separate actions Some states involve more than one action – e.g. in Tennessee, there is one action for the

entire state SIP and a second for a SIP revision for a specific facility (Eastman)

To date, we have completed 18 final actions with either approved SIPs or partial FIPs (see map)

A separate schedule is being negotiated for Florida. Informal agreement has been reached to extend action on Arizona to a later

date, TBD

Regional Haze SIP/FIP Status(through April 30, 2012)

29

66

33

States with final SIPs submitted to EPA but not yet acted on by EPA

San Juan GS Final EPA FIP

States that have not submitted final SIPs to EPA (includes HI and VI)

EPA has proposed action on the full SIP and/or a FIP (includes AK)

2727

1212

Final Regional Haze SIP has been acted on by EPA (full approval of program, except NV and ND; Arkansas is partial disapproval, West Virginia and Kentucky are limited disapproval. EPA deferred action on BART for Eastman Chemical in Tennessee because a new SIP is expected.)

44Final SIP or FIP has been approved by EPA – BART only

Four Corners FIP proposed by EPA

D.C. (Final approved SIP)

Other EPA Actions on Regional Haze SIPs

30

Transport Rule Better-Than-BART determination Proposal was published in the Federal Register on

December 30, 2011. Comment period was extended to February 28, 2012. Final rule is expected in May 2012.

FIPs: Three FIPs have been finalized: 1 power plant in NM, 3

power plants in OK, and 2 power plants in ND. Three proposed FIPs: NV, NY and MT There may also be FIPs for many states to substitute

CSAPR for CAIR as the alternative to source-specific BART for EGUs.

Regional Haze SIPs – Periodic Review and 2018 Revision

31

Periodic report describing progress toward reasonable progress goals [§51.308(g)] and [§51.309(d)(10)] Report is due 5 years from submittal of the initial SIP under 308, and in

2013 under 309

Must be in the form of a SIP revision

Evaluate adequacy of existing plan and act accordingly [§51.308(h)]

EPA is working with the states to clarify expectations and will provide any guidance, as appropriate

2018 SIP revision must fully satisfy RH rule requirements [§51.308(f)] Comprehensive SIP revision due July 31, 2018, with revised reasonable

progress goals, if necessary

EPA intends to hold future meeting with RPOs to discuss the requirements and develop a strategy to meet the requirements

Exceptional Events Rule Implementation Guidance

32

EPA is developing guidance and other tools to improve implementation of the Exceptional Events Rule.

EPA released draft guidance documents to state, local, and tribal stakeholders for comment in 2011 and is almost done revising the draft guidance documents.

EPA intends to publish very shortly a Notice of Availability in the Federal Register announcing the availability of the revised draft guidance documents and a detailed Response to Comments document for public comment.

Policy on Wildfires and Prescribed Burns

33

Draft policy to address managing air quality impacts from wildfires and prescribed burns was submitted for OMB review in February 2010

Because of concerns identified by other federal agencies, we withdrew it to address their issues

An intent of the policy is to address agriculture burning Have been working internally with EPA Regions on appropriate

issues to address in the guidance Also have had several meetings with federal agencies to

understand their specific concerns and still have issues to work with and resolve with them After we finish with the Federal agencies, we will schedule meetings with

interested states and local agencies and Federal agencies to discuss the results of our discussions and get their input.

EPA will then draft revised policy and put it out for comment in late 2012

Draft NSPS Draft Proposal for New Residential Wood Heaters Tightens PM emission limits and expands scope to include additional

appliances Retains flexibility to issue final rules from a wide range of options and

considerations Wood Stoves:

Proposes matching tightest state levels, i.e., State of Washington Describes options for even tighter standards Eliminates exemptions for single-burn-rate stoves and pellet stoves

Outdoor Wood Boilers Co-proposal: (a) PM limit of 0.32 lb/MMBTU (~90% reduction) in 2014 and 0.15 lb/MMBTU (~95%

reduction) in 2017 (b) 0.15 lb/MMBTU immediately Asks for specific comments and data without stating a preference Discusses concerns about short-term emissions, proposes a maximum emission rate per

test run (7.5 grams per hour), and asks for data for development of future options

Not regulating fireplaces Preamble expresses concern about cost-effectiveness of a potential nationwide

regulation ($22,000 per ton) but also states that some areas may need additional measures

34

Draft NSPS Draft Proposal for NewResidential Wood Heaters: Status

Draft proposal in Office of Policy since February 10

Still waiting for OMB to accept receipt of rule

OMB has full plate of court-ordered rules

This rule is not court-ordered

If OMB were to receive draft rule now, the anticipated schedule would be: August 2012 – Proposed rule signed and published

September 2012 -- Public hearing

November 2012 -- 90-day public comment period ends

Summer 2013 – Final rule signed and published

Questions? Contact Gil Wood at [email protected] or 919-541-5272.

35

GHG Permitting: Steps under the Tailoring Rule

36

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

• Step 1: Sources already subject to PSD “anyway” and GHG emissions = or > than (tpy CO2e): New source: NA PSD Modification: 75,000

• Step 2: Step 1 plus sources with GHG emissions = or > than (tpy CO2e) : New source: 100,000PSD Modification: 75,000

• Step 3: Implementation of potential additional phase-in and streamlining options

• 5-year study: To examine GHG permitting for smaller sources

• Implementation of rule based on 5-year study

Study Complete

2016

GHG Permit Status

37

As of April 13, 2012, we are aware of 31 companies/plants that have been issued GHG permits (since January 2, 2011) EPA has issued 5 of these permits (Palmdale Hybrid Energy Center, CA; Eni Holy Cross Drilling

Project, OCS Eastern GOM; Lower Colorado River Authority, TX; and Port Dolphin Energy LNG Port, OCS Eastern GOM ; Pioneer Valley Energy Center, MA )

SIP-approved state/local permitting authorities issued the other 26 EPA is continuing to provide comments on draft GHG permits to be issued by

state agencies EPA is currently reviewing approximately 27 GHG permit applications for which

EPA will issue the permits In addition to these issued and pending permits, EPA is tracking roughly 80

additional PSD permit applications that likely include a GHG component have been submitted and include source categories such as: Biofuel Production Cement Plants Electric Generating Units Lime Production Facilities Outer Continental Shelf Exploration Pulp and Paper Mills Refineries

Bottom line: documentation of GHG control considerations and BACT limits is important for a robust permit record

Biomass and GHG Permitting

38

Biomass Deferral In July 2011, EPA issued a rule to defer completely the

application of pre-construction permitting requirements to biomass-fired CO2 and other biogenic CO2 emissions for a period of three years. Final Rule, Fact Sheet, and Response to Comments at:

http://www.epa.gov/nsr/actions.html; Deferral applies to CO2 emissions only.

EPA sent a biomass study to SAB for review in September 2011

Next steps: SAB to issue letter on biomass study (anticipated Spring

2012) EPA to address SAB comments as appropriate If necessary, EPA would propose rule on how to treat

biomass in permitting

Other GHG Permitting Activities

39

Tailoring Rule Step 3 rulemaking underway Proposal comment period ended on April 20, 2012 Final rule to be completed this summer

GHG Permit Streamlining Workgroup under CAAAC 2015 – Completion of GHG PSD study 2016 – Step 4 final rule

GHG Permit Streamlining Integral part of the phase-in approach to GHG

permitting requirements

Has the potential to: Obviate the applicability of PSD and title V requirements

for some GHG-emitting sources Promote more efficient treatment of GHG-emitting sources

that will already be subject to these programs Allow the expansion of PSD and title V applicability to

more GHG-emitting sources while protecting sources and permitting authorities from undue resource burdens

40

GHG Permit Streamlining (cont.)

EPA has proposed two streamlining measures as part of the recent Step 3 proposal: Increasing the flexibility and improving the usefulness of plantwide

applicability limitations (PALs) for GHGs Creating the regulatory authority for EPA to issue synthetic minor permits

for GHGs in those areas where EPA is the PSD permitting authority

EPA has also identified other potential streamlining measures in the Step 3 proposal: Defining Potential to Emit (PTE) for various source categories Establishing emissions limits for various source categories that constitute

presumptive Best Available Control Technologies Establishing procedures for use of general permits and permits-by-rule

for source categories such as boilers and emergency engines Establishing procedures for electronic permitting and “lean” techniques

for permit process improvements Excluding “empty permits” from the title V permitting program

41

GHG Permit Streamlining Workgroup Purpose: To develop and recommend to EPA potential

streamlining approaches for GHG permitting. Permit streamlining techniques and approaches are a

key component of GHG permitting under the CAA. A key factor in EPA’s phased-in approach to GHG

permitting under the CAA is the ability of permitting authorities to issue timely permits and for sources subject to permitting to obtain and comply with those permits.

Streamlining approaches that could help expedite permitting and make more efficient use of resources need to be developed to allow expansion of the permitting programs to smaller sources of GHG emissions.

42

GHG Permit Streamlining Work Group Charge1. Review the EPA identified streamlining methods and

source categories. Confirm, expand or narrow both the scope of streamlining methods EPA should explore further, and the source categories that may be well-suited either individually, or collectively for each streamlining approach.

2. Identify the regulatory and policy barriers associated with further development of permit streamlining methods for each of the source categories, and recommend approaches to address those barriers.

3. Prioritize the source categories and streamlining methods for further development by EPA and recommend an implementation approach for each method.

43

GHG Streamlining Work Group Deliverables and Deadlines Work Group started in April 2012 and is to

complete its work by October 2012

Deliverables and Deadlines: Draft Interim Written Report – August 15, 2012

Draft Final Written Report – September 15, 2012 To be delivered and deliberated upon by the CAAAC for submission to

EPA. The final report may also address the issues and potential barriers

associated with further development of permit streamlining methods and recommend implementation strategies.

44

SIP Improvement: Overview Questions What state/local concerns and how are we

addressing them? What are we ultimately trying to achieve? Where do we go from here?

45

What are state/local concerns and how are we addressing them? EPA has been engaging with states through different means

over many months to better understand state concerns associated with SIP guidance, development, and processing. For example, the ECOS/NACAA SIP Reform Work Group started with a

list of the 13 highest-priority potential SIP process reforms

Through these various modes, we have come to identify two broad categories of issues: Consistent, timely, and efficient SIP processing Timely completion of EPA guidance documents, including state

involvement in guidance development process

46

Consistent, timely, and efficient SIP processing Consistency

Consistency memo: addresses state submittal requirements, clarifies clean data vs. redesignation requests, and the use of letter notices (issued April 6, 2011) Addressed 4 of 13 issues identified by ECOS/NACAA SIP Reform Work Group

Elevation memo: describes the process for EPA regional and HQ offices to raise issues related to broad categories of SIPs (e.g., infrastructure SIPs) in order to ensure they are addressed appropriately across the regions (issued March 30, 2012)

Timeliness EPA SIP Backlog Work Group

Commitment to address over 200 backlogged SIPs by end of FY 2012 as part of Key Performance Indicator (KPI)

Menu of options to assist in processing SIP backlogs

Efficiency SIP Kaizen process (e.g., ozone TSD, ozone cross-walk, and menu of control

options) National SIP tracking database SIP dashboard

Initially identified 20 SIP-related policy issues requiring resolution; only a handful remain

47

Timely completion of EPA guidance documents, including state involvement

We launched a full lifecycle analysis and action plan (LCAP) for implementation of the 2013 PM NAAQS

Comprehensive, full cycle critical analysis A real program, rather than a “pilot” effort, that can be

transferable and become core part of how we do business in the future

Time horizon is from inception of new or revised NAAQS through attainment and beyond (SIP approvals, attainment findings, redesignations)

EPA working with ECOS/NACAA SIP Reform Work Group to complete this analysis and associated work plan in CY2012

Will also serve as the response to a request by ECOS for EPA to conduct an implementation project

48

What are we trying to achieve? LCAP will serve as an important learning tool

It represents an holistic, integrated attempt to bring together all of our previous efforts and lessons-learned with respect to SIP guidance, planning and processing

State involvement every step of the way in LCAP

Ultimate goal for LCAP Develop a roadmap to use as a tool for planning

and carrying out implementation of future NAAQS

49

Steps to get started -- Visualizing successful implementation of the 2013 PM NAAQS Make a Big List of all the “things” necessary for success, such

as: CAA interpretations or EPA policies. Technical information, tools, and technical results. Work processes and decision making processes. Tools to speed administrative work. Goals and tracking systems. Communication practices.

Answer questions for each item on the Big List, such as: Timing. Will existing guidance do the job? How do we get it into the right hands so it can be used? Lessons from the past? Already underway vs. need to start a new effort? How to achieve quality with respect to the needs of the users? Competing priorities.

50

Steps to get started -- Visualizing successful implementation of the 2013 PM NAAQS (Cont.)

Develop a plan of attack and a schedule for each item on the Big List, such as: Accountable leaders. SIP Reform Work Group role. Involve eventual users. Use the expertise of staff in HQ offices, the

Regions, and the state and local agencies. Tracking and progress reporting.

51

Where do we go from here? Initiate and complete work on the “Big List”

for PM LCAP in summer 2012 Work with ECOS/NACAA SIP Reform Work Group

and non-NACAA states for input Create work plan to address items on Big List,

initiate certain actions and complete work by December 2012 Leverage tools and guidance already completed

Bottom line: Use LCAP exercise to help develop roadmap for implementing future NAAQS

52

Questions or comments?

53

54

Appendix

RH Actions and Next Steps for States SIPs where we have taken final action

55

Litigant1 State Date of Action Final Action taken Next StepsWEG California June 14, 2011 Full approval 5 yr. progress report due

March 17, 2014WEG Oregon (all BART

elements)June 21, 2011 BART approval Proposal for remaining SIP

elements due May 15, 2012

WEG Idaho (all BART elements) June 21, 2011 BART approval Proposal for remaining SIP elements due May 15, 2012

WEG New Mexico- San Juan Generating Station

August 22, 2011 FIP for BART for NOx Proposal for remaining SIP elements due May 16, 2012

NPCA, et al. Delaware July 19, 2011 Full approval 5 yr. progress report due September 25, 2013

NPCA, et al. Nevada - (except for Reid Gardner BART)

June 22, 2011

Approval Final action for BART for Reid Gardner due on July 13, 2012

WEG Oklahoma (all BART elements)

December 28, 2011 Partial approval; FIP for BART for SO2 at 6 EGUs at 3 facilities

Proposal for remaining SIP elements due May 15, 2012

NPCA, et al. Kansas December 27, 2011 Full approval 5 yr. progress report due November 4, 2014

NPCA, et al. New Jersey August 11, 2011 Full approval 5 yr. progress report due July 28, 2014

NPCA, et al. District of Columbia February 2, 2012 Full approval 5 yr. progress report due September 21, 2015

1 Note: WEG=WildEarth Guardians, NPCA= National Parks Conservation Association

RH Actions and Next Steps for States SIPs where we have taken final action

56

Litigant1 State Date of Action Final Action taken Next StepsSierra Club Arkansas March 12, 2012 Partial Approval/Partial

DisapprovalTwo-year FIP clock for EPA to correct deficiencies

WEG North Dakota April 6, 2012 Partial Approval/Partial Disapproval

Two-year FIP clock for EPA to correct deficiencies

Kentucky Env. Foundation Kentucky March 30, 2012 Limited Approval/limited disapproval of CAIR-dependent elements

Two-year FIP clock for EPA to correct deficiencies of reliance on CAIR

NPCA, et al. Maine April 24, 2012 Full approval 5 yr. progress report due December 9, 2015

NPCA, et al. West Virginia March 23, 2012 Limited Approval/limited disapproval of CAIR-dependent elements

FIP to replace reliance on CAIR with reliance on CSAPR by May 30, 2012

NPCA, et al. South Dakota March 29, 2012 Full approval 5 yr. progress report due February 2, 2016

NPCA, et al. Tennessee (all SIP elements except BART for Eastman Chemical)

April 24, 2012 Limited Approval/limited disapproval of CAIR-dependent elements

FIP to replace reliance on CAIR with reliance on CSAPR by May 30, 2012


RH Actions and Next Steps for States SIPs where we have taken proposed action

57

Litigant1 State Date of Action Proposed Action taken Next StepsNPCA, et al. Illinois January 26, 2012 Proposed full approval Final action due May 30,

2012NPCA, et al. Indiana January 26, 2012 Limited Approval/limited

disapproval of CAIR-dependent elements

FIP to replace reliance on CAIR with reliance on CSAPR – final action due May 30, 2012

NPCA, et al. Minnesota (all SIP elements except BART for 6 taconite facilities)

January 25, 2012 Proposed approval BART for taconite – proposal due July 13, 2012

NPCA, et al. Ohio January 25, 2012 Limited Approval/limited disapproval of CAIR-dependent elements


NPCA, et al. Pennsylvania January 25, 2012 Limited Approval/limited disapproval of CAIR-dependent elements


NPCA, et al. Virginia January 25, 2012 Limited Approval/limited disapproval of CAIR-dependent elements


NPCA, et al. Alabama February 28, 2012 Limited Approval/limited disapproval of CAIR-dependent elements

Final Action due by June 15, 2012

NPCA, et al. Alaska February 24, 2012 Proposed Full Approval Final Action due June 15, 2012 for BART; November 15, 2012 for remaining elements



58

Litigant1 State Date of Action Proposed Action taken Next StepsNPCA, et al. Georgia February 27, 2012 Limited Approval/limited



NPCA, et al. Iowa February 28, 2012 Limited Approval/limited disapproval of CAIR-dependent elements


NPCA, et al. Louisiana February 28, 2012 Limited Approval/limited disapproval of CAIR-dependent elements for NOx; disapproved BART for SO2 for EGUs


NPCA, et al. Maryland February 28, 2012 Proposed full approval Final Action due by June 15, 2012

NPCA, et al. Mississippi February 28, 2012 Limited Approval/limited disapproval of CAIR-dependent elements for NOx; disapproved BART for SO2 for EGUs


NPCA, et al. Missouri February 28, 2012 Limited Approval/limited disapproval of CAIR-dependent elements


NPCA, et al. Nebraska March 2, 2012 Partial Approval/Partial disapproval of BART for SO2 for one EGU; proposed FIP to rely on CSAPR better than BART for the disapproved BART determination




59

Litigant1 State Date of Action Proposed Action taken Next StepsNPCA, et al. New Hampshire February 28, 2012 Full Approval Final Action due by July

13, 2012NPCA, et al. North Carolina February 28, 2012 Limited Approval/limited



NPCA, et al. Rhode Island February 28, 2012 Full Approval Final Action due by June 15, 2012

NPCA, et al. South Carolina February 28, 2012 Limited Approval/limited disapproval of CAIR-dependent elements


NPCA, et al. Vermont February 28, 2012 Full Approval June 15, 2012

NPCA, et al. Wisconsin February 28, 2012 Full Approval June 15, 2012

NPCA, et al. Connecticut March 26, 2012 Full Approval Final Action due by June 15, 2012

NPCA, et al. Nevada – Reid Gardner BART

April 12, 2012 FIP Final action due by July 13, 2012

NPCA, et al. NM – Albuquerque/Bernalilio County

April 13, 2012 Full Approval Final Action due by July 13, 2012

WEG Montana April 20, 2012 FIP Final Action due August 15, 2012

NPCA, et al. New York April 25, 2012 FIP Final Action due August 16, 2012

WEG Colorado March 26, 2012 Full Approval September 6, 2012

WEG Utah April 30, 2012 Partial Approval/Partial disapproval of BART for NOx at 2 power plants

Final action due October 31, 2012


RH Actions and Next Steps for States SIPs where we have yet to take action

60

Litigant1 State Date of Action Proposed Action taken Next StepsNPCA, et al. New Mexico (remaining

SIP elements)Proposal due May 16, 2012

Final action due August 15, 2012

NPCA, et al. Massachusetts Proposal due May 15, 2012

Final action due September 14, 2012

NPCA, et al. Hawaii Proposal due May 14, 2012

FIP expected Final action due September 14, 2012

NPCA, et al. Virgin Islands Proposal due May 14, 2012

FIP expected Final action due September 14, 2012

NPCA, et al. Wyoming Proposal due May 15, 2012

Final action due October 15, 2012

NPCA, et al. Arizona Proposal due May 15, 2012

Final action due November 15, 2012

NPCA, et al. Idaho (remaining SIP elements)

Proposal due May 15, 2012


NPCA, et al. Oklahoma (remaining SIP elements)



NPCA, et al. Oregon (remaining SIP elements)



NPCA, et al. Tennessee (Eastman Chemical BART)



NPCA, et al. Texas Proposal due May 15, 2012


NPCA, et al. Washington Proposal due May 15, 2012


NPCA, et al. Michigan Proposal due July 13, 2012


NPCA, et al. Minnesota – taconite BART

Proposal due July 13, 2012



Clean Air Updates: NAAQS and Other Implementation-Related Topics

Documents

Transcript of Clean Air Updates: NAAQS and Other Implementation-Related Topics